Skip to main content
Log in

A computational approach to implicit entities and events in text and discourse

  • Published:
International Journal of Speech Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper we will focus on the notion of “implicit” or lexically unexpressed linguistic elements that are nonetheless necessary for a complete semantic interpretation of a text. We refer to “entities” and “events” because the recovery of the implicit material may affect all the modules of a system for semantic processing, from the grammatically guided components to the inferential and reasoning ones. Reference to the system GETARUNS offers one possible implementation of the algorithms and procedures needed to cope with the problem and enables us to deal with all the spectrum of phenomena. The paper will address at first the following three types of “implicit” entities and events:

  • the grammatical ones, as suggested by a linguistic theories like LFG or similar generative theories;

  • the semantic ones suggested in the FrameNet project, i.e. CNI, DNI, INI;

  • the pragmatic ones: here we will present a theory and an implementation for the recovery of implicit entities and events of (non-) standard implicatures.

In particular we will show how the use of commonsense knowledge may fruitfully contribute to find relevant implied meanings. Last Implicit Entity only touched on, though for lack of space, is the Subject of Point of View, which is computed by Semantic Informational Structure and contributes the intended entity from whose point of view a given subjective statement is expressed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, A., Garrod, S. C., & Sanford, A. J. (1983). The accessibility of pronominal antecedents as a function of episode shifts in narrative text.

  • Baker, C. F., Fillmore, C. J., & Lowe, J. B. (1998). The Berkeley FrameNet project. In Proceedings of COLING-ACL-98, Montreal, Canada.

  • Bresnan, J. (2000). Lexical-functional syntax. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • ComLex. http://nlp.cs.nyu.edu/comlex.

  • Delmonte, R. (2007–2009). Computational linguistic text processing. New York: Nova Science Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fellbaum, C. (Ed.) (1998). WordNet: an electronic lexical database. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics : Vol. 3. Speech acts (pp. 41–58). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grosz, B. (1981). Focusing and description in natural language dialogues. In A. Joshi, B. Webber, & I. Sag (Eds.), Elements of discourse understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grosz, B., & Sidner, C. (1986). Attention, intentions and the structure of discourse. Computational Linguistics, 12, 175–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lenat, D. B. (1995). CYC: a large-scale investment in knowledge infrastructure. Communications of the ACM, 38(11).

  • Liu, H., & Singh, P. (2004). ConceptNet: a practical commonsense reasoning toolkit. At http://web.media.mit.edu/~push/ConceptNet.pdf.

  • Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, E. T. (2007). Modelling space and time in narratives about restaurants. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 22(1), 67–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A (1983). 35(3), 427–440.

  • Sanford, A. J., & Garrod, S. C. (1981). Understanding written language: exploration in comprehension beyond the sentence. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanford, A. J., & Garrod, S. C. (1988). Thematic subjecthood and cognitive constraints on discourse structure. Journal of Pragmatics, 12(5–6), 519–534.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanford, A. J., & Garrod, S. (1998). The role of scenario mapping in text comprehension. Discourse Processes, 26, 159–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schank, R. C., & Abelson, R. P. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals and understanding: an inquiry into human knowledge structures. Hilsdale: Erlbaum.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Sidner, C. (1983). Focusing in the comprehension of definite anaphora. In M. Brady & R. Berwick (Eds.), Computational models of discourse (pp. 267–330). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rodolfo Delmonte.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Delmonte, R. A computational approach to implicit entities and events in text and discourse. Int J Speech Technol 11, 195 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10772-009-9049-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10772-009-9049-1

Navigation